Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31559463›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2020

Acute ACL reconstruction shows superior clinical results and can be performed safely without an increased risk of developing arthrofibrosis.

Christoffer von Essen, Karl Eriksson, Björn Barenius

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Delaying anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for more than 3 or 6 months results in lower risk of revision surgery.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christoffer von EssenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Stockholm South Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Christoffer.vonessen@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6871-3267
Karl ErikssonDepartment of Orthopaedics, Stockholm South Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Björn BareniusDepartment of Orthopaedics, Stockholm South Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare acute ACL reconstruction (ACLR) within 8 days of injury with delayed reconstruction after normalized range of motion (ROM), 6-10 weeks after injury. It was hypothesized that acute ACL reconstruction with modern techniques is safe and can be beneficial in terms of patient-reported outcomes and range of motion.

methodsThe effect of acute and delayed ACLR was randomized studied on 70 patients with high recreational activity level, Tegner level 6 or more, between 2006 and 2013. Patient-reported outcomes, objective IKDC, KOOS, and manual stability measurements were documented during the 24-month follow-up period.

resultsThe acute ACLR group did not result in increased stiffness and showed superior outcome regarding strength and how the patient felt their knee functioning at 24 months. In addition, the acute group was not inferior to the delayed group in any assessment. Regarding patient-related outcomes in KOOS, both groups showed significant improvements in all subscales, but no difference was found between the groups. Functional return (FR) rate was almost double compared to the Swedish knee ligament register and treatment failure (TF) rate was reduced by half, no significant difference between the groups. No difference regarding cyclops removal, re-injury of ACL or meniscus was found between the two surgical timing groups.

conclusionAcute ACLR within 8 days of injury does not appear to adversely affect ROM or result in increased stiffness in the knee joint and was not inferior to the delayed group in any assessment when compared to delayed surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresAdolescentAdultAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesHumansJoint DiseasesRange of Motion, ArticularSwedenTime-to-TreatmentYoung AdultACLAcuteReconstructionStiffness

Identifiers

PMID31559463
PMCPMC7347704
OpenAlexW2976688873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.